Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 17, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar
Iraq: A War

Iraq: A War

Chris Hedges
$20.00

more items

 
Arts and Culture

Tony Blair’s Journey

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 16, 2010

By Peter Stothard

(Page 3)

Media studies has long been one of Blair’s specialities – and there is much of it in this book, some nuanced and some not. Excessive examination of media rights and wrongs tends to make its participants mad. Blair focuses comically on one his favourite paradoxes in describing a moment when he admits himself to have been as maddened by media frustration as at any time in the book. The setting is the first night at the Millennium Dome, an early New Labour disaster in which, I should declare, I was involuntarily involved. On the last afternoon of the second millennium, the then Prime Minister, as he describes the scene, is dreading the formal opening of the third, just as is almost everyone else due to be present at Greenwich, including the Queen. In line with his lowest expectations, the big “River of Fire” fireworks go fut; the big “Millennium Wheel” does not turn. While he, his family, and the royal party are safely delivered to the £700 million plastic tent of fun on a new Tube line and in good time for midnight, the nation’s newspaper editors, of whom I was then one, were left queuing for hours at Stratford Station.

At this point of discovery Blair engages the minister in charge, his old friend and flatmate Lord “Charlie” Falconer, vigorously and by the lapels:

“Please, please, dear God, please tell me you didn’t have the media coming here by tube from Stratford just like ordinary members of the public.”

“Well, we thought it would be more democratic that way.”
“Democratic? What fool thought that? They’re the media, for Christ’s sake. They write about the people, they don’t want to be treated like them.” “Well, what did you want us to do, get them all a stretch limo?” “Yes, Charlie”, I thundered, “with the boy or girl of their choice and as much champagne as they can drink.”

 

book cover

 

A Journey: My Political Life

 

By Tony Blair

 

Knopf, 720 pages

 

Buy the book

Arguments over whether the media or the politicians or neither of the above had the closest ties to the public became a commonplace of the Blair years, though few of them were quite so neatly expressed. If the politicians wanted to win the battle to be closest to the voters, how was this to be done except by seeming to be most like them? On Millennium night it did not matter too much who was the victor. After the first phase of the Iraq war was over it mattered rather more. A central issue was over a single unspoken word: “sorry”. The question was not the right or wrong of going to war itself (though this was asked vigorously too), but how a modern politician should respond to the consequences. I raised this with him very specifically myself, on a plane journey back from Athens after the end of the period described in my diary of that time, Thirty Days. He told me that for every death that had happened as a result of his actions, however rightly or wrongly taken, he would answer to his Maker. That would be his continuing burden until the time to answer to his Maker came.

Not so long ago that would have been an answer – whatever its merits or demerits – wholly normal, in line with commonly held public attitudes, perfectly suggestive of a politician who was a “person like us”. Today the merits or otherwise of that proposition remain the same, but its closeness to public attitudes has dramatically changed. Consider the likely stance of the “normal sort of guy”, whose traits the politicians must seem to share, the kind who buys an ice cream cone for a friend, talks more freely than his parents did about sex, and maintains his teenage crush on rock stars into late middle age: if such a man does something for the very best of reasons, after the very deepest thought, and there are terrible unforeseen consequences, he says “sorry” to those affected. He may also say that “sorry” is an inadequate and insufficient response; that many others owe him their gratitude for the same actions; even that he will answer to whatever awaits him in any afterlife for what he did; but he will say “sorry” anyway and as well.

The politician that is Tony Blair is not, however, a normal person, whatever his ice cream stunts, sexual frankness and membership of the U2 fan club might make the unwary think. When asked at the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War, in January this year, if he has any regrets, he feels “sick, a mixture of anger and anguish”. He sees the question, wholly accurately, as a “headline question”, one designed to produce in black-and-white print “BLAIR APOLOGISES FOR WAR, AT LAST HE SAYS SORRY”. He argues to himself, as described in A Journey, that he will not risk the cause in which he continues to believe by giving succour to his enemies. To those whose passion is only about his past failings, he argues that he takes “responsibility” instead, a continuing commitment, not one that can be closed in his lifetime. He feels “words of condolence and sympathy to be entirely inadequate”. His life itself, the simple truth that “they have died and I, the decision-maker in the circumstances that led to their deaths, still live” is his answer, the answer not of a normal man but of a politician, an extraordinary man and politician, who had too successfully pretended to be normal.

Peter Stothard is editor of The TLS and author of “Spartacus Road: A Journey Through Ancient Italy” and “Thirty Days: A Month at the Heart of Blair’s War.” Between 1992 and 2002, he was editor of Britain’s Times.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By jazzy, October 1, 2010 at 4:39 am Link to this comment

Pity so many of the people who voted him into office came from Wales and Scotland. And got so little back.
Alloggio Bucarest

Report this

By Hitch, September 26, 2010 at 9:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Tony Blair, I have a Chap Stick concession…. when you’re done kissing the Pope’s ass, I can offer you a generous discount.

Report this

By Hitch, September 26, 2010 at 9:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Tony, I have a Chap Stick franchise, If you need some when you’re done kissing the Pope’s ass, I can give you a discount.

Report this

By diamond, September 26, 2010 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

What Tony Blair should have done was said to Bush: “Look George, I’m a lawyer, an upholder of the rule of law. If you want to conduct two illegal wars without UN sanction then you can surely understand that as a lawyer who respects international law and the United Nations I simply can’t have anything to do with it and I intend to give a speech in the parliament condemning these wars as dangerous and disastrous at the first opportunity. If, however, you want to conduct an international criminal investigation into both 9/11 and the anthrax letters Britain will do everything in its power to assist that investigation.’ But he didn’t. And why? What is his excuse for not behaving like someone who understood the law and throwing his lot in with the criminals? Oh, well, he believed it was right. His religious fervour, which he concealed from the voters of Britain for years, told him it was right. This is the same thinking of a man who carries out an ‘honour’ killing. He may believe what he’s doing is right but does that make it right? Blair, no doubt, would say that these killings are cruel, inhuman and unjust but that doesn’t stop him using the same argument they would use to defend killing their sister or daughter to defend his political, financial and military support of two wars in which literally millions have died, been maimed or been displaced.

The protesters turning up at his book signings and getting them cancelled exist to remind him that his view of himself and his place in history is also based on belief not fact. And he should also remember that Hitler wrote a book, one in which he set out his beliefs. It didn’t salvage Hitler’s legacy: instead it became infamous. I think Blair’s book will have a similar fate.

Report this

By Dr. O. P. Sudrania, September 20, 2010 at 12:41 pm Link to this comment

After hearing him in his trial on Iraq war in UK, I felt that he is a self styled bigot. US/UK together make up a most powerful single super power and they can do anything unopposed. But it does not lead to healthy trends in the modern era of fast IT days. I certainly lost respect for this gentleman.

When asked if he will do it again, he arrogantly said yes. The result of that trial was visible already.

God bless the UK,

Dr. O. P. Sudrania

Report this
Ouroborus's avatar

By Ouroborus, September 20, 2010 at 12:28 pm Link to this comment

By robert puglia, September 20 at 3:17 am Link to this
comment
(Unregistered commenter)

long journey, short pier
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

+1

Report this

By msgmi, September 20, 2010 at 7:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Blair is disingenuous in his arguments…he failed to check on Sun Tsu’s ‘Art of War’ and his emotions carried his common sense logic…leadership from the gut is no leadership…the intel regarding Iraq’s WMD was inconclusive at best and made conclusive by the efforts of Dick Cheney and his entourage of neo-CONS…indeed it was a con job from the beginning and incompetence at its best, especially from SecDef Rumseld whose ‘shock & awe’ philosophy has no merit when it comes to asymetrical warfare.

Report this

By robert puglia, September 19, 2010 at 11:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

long journey, short pier

Report this

By firefly, September 19, 2010 at 9:16 pm Link to this comment

Tony Blair is nothing more than an ego-centric
megalomaniac with chronic delusions of grandeur.  His
desperate need for attention will be his ultimate
downfall. Thankfully, he will gradually fade into
obscurity and be nothing more than a bad memory (if he
is remembered at all) for the rest of the world

Report this

By Anne, September 19, 2010 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Don’t they all look like Palin, nothing but desparate to sell more books ...

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, September 19, 2010 at 4:06 am Link to this comment

Make no mistake that Tony Blair’s journey was undertaken in the service of evil and as the advocate of the Devil and its murderous schemes!

This is the summary of this savage’s journey, and the least we can do is not to honor him by wasting our money and time on reading this garbage! And the most honorable thing we can do is to work hard on demanding that this evil criminal, along with his evil partner G.W. Bush, should be brought to an international court of justice for all their crimes against humanity.

Report this
de profundis clamavi's avatar

By de profundis clamavi, September 18, 2010 at 6:12 pm Link to this comment

There never was anything more or less to Tony Blair’s character than pure vanity and ambition. Britain isn’t a big or powerful enough country for its prime minister to be a household name across the globe, and he craved global celebrity status. To get that, he hitched his wagon to George W Bush’s so he could pose on the international stage as a “world statesman”. He tried to promote an image of himself as the brains behind Bush on the international stage. He continues to attempt to promote himself as a Great Leader through his empty and futile mission as Middle East peace envoy. Britain is well rid of him, they know it, and at last he seems to have worked that one out. Could somebody please persuade him that there are extra-terrestrials out there somewhere hungering for a taste of his “star quality”? Give him a rocket and a one-way ticket to oblivion.

Report this

By de profundis clamavi, September 18, 2010 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There never was anything more or less to Tony Blair’s character than pure vanity and ambition. Britain isn’t a big or powerful enough country for its prime minister to be a household name across the globe, and he craved global celebrity status. To get that, he hitched his wagon to George W Bush’s so he could pose on the international stage as a “world statesman”. He tried to promote an image of himself as the brains behind Bush on the international stage. He continues to attempt to promote himself as a Great Leader through his empty and futile mission as Middle East peace envoy. Britain is well rid of him, they know it, and at last he seems to have worked that one out. Could somebody please persuade him that there are extra-terrestrials out there somewhere hungering for a taste of his “star quality”? Give him a rocket and a one-way ticket to oblivion, and give me a break.

Report this

By Sodium-Na, September 18, 2010 at 4:38 pm Link to this comment

In Britain,Tony Blair is dubbed as George W. Bush’s doglap.

Well,he and his master are considered by millions upon millions,if not billios,of people,across the globe,as WAR CRIMINALS,for the immoral and illegal destruction of Iraq,a functioning society that has done us no harm,whatsoever. Both should be indicted and face justice.

My codolence,for not Blair and Bush being
indicted,sofar,lies in the fact that there is no legal status of limitation for war criminals and their cohorts who instigated and pushed hard for the war against Iraq,in the first place.

Report this

By Arouete, September 18, 2010 at 4:24 pm Link to this comment

Truthdig! Give us a break! Are you actually trying to drive your readers nuts? This opaque popup when we his the print option is maddening! WHY do you do this?  Give us a break.  You beat out any pop up blocker. They are as invidious as Monsanto seeds. Pop up are to the internet as cockroaches are to restaurants. They drive your customers away. Get a clue.  AND there is no single page option! Give us a break! Whatrufolks smokin’?! You really know how to irritate the hell out of your readers. Stop screwing it all up with stupid good ideas.

Report this

By Druthers, September 18, 2010 at 2:57 pm Link to this comment

A journet? It think it would better be called a shipwreck.

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, September 18, 2010 at 1:10 pm Link to this comment

Reason, can be the perfect disguise for the basest instincts that men try to conceal from each other, and above all themselves.

Without moral values, we have rule by madness.
From which only chaos results.

God, is not a businessman, there will be no deals for any of us.

For many of our so called leaders Judgement day, will likely be viewed, as little more than a pissing contest, for great egos derive from great pain.

It’s easy to do things when your unconscious, unaware, insensitive, and for many death will only mean a deeper sleep than the one they already live.

Report this

By walldizo, September 18, 2010 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It would have been advisable for tb to wipe out his shameful past and accept his present post as ago between messanger for the quartet, hoping that people will one day forget him as an insult to the British premiership.With a loot reaching above $30million,tb has no business to even consider running for a Labour post.This man has betrayed his class and should be diposed of in garbage of history.

Report this

By TheHandyman, September 18, 2010 at 11:55 am Link to this comment

Blair, like Bush, Obama, and other leaders who wear their religious beliefs on their coat sleeves for all to see, cluck, shake their heads and lament the unnecessary deaths they have caused and say who they will have to answer to their maker. The real truth of it is that they don’t really believe that. They think that they can stand before their maker and lie as successfully to IT as they did to their fellow humans. They think that Thou Shalt not Kill has codicils and caveats that allow them to get away with murder. “The blood is not on my hands, Lord,” that is more than likely what they will say when confronted. “I was only doing your bidding, Lord,” will be their second lame excuse remembering how they told everyone that GOD told them to embark on these useless wars!

I am an atheist. I want my justice now! If there is any deterrent value in hanging War Criminals who deliberately defy the the good graces of being civilized and act like the lowest most vile barbarian then I want them tried, their crime enumerated and published for all to see, and then executed in public for all to see that no one is above the law of humanity. I want these mass murders to suffer the same penalties as every other serial mass murderer! To allow them to ride in their limo’s spewing their mea culpa’s and getting ever richer only allows the next person elected to high office think that they too can get away with murder.

If there is a GOD, then all I ask is that I be allowed to watch their moment of reckoning, along with all those they murdered!

Report this

By samosamo, September 18, 2010 at 11:28 am Link to this comment

****************


By Unconventional Ideas, September 18 at 8:56 am

Not to ‘justify’ tb’s role at all, this well planned and evil
juggernaut, that eisenhower blatantly warned americans about,
would have adroitly given tb a ‘deal he could not refuse’ as for
whatever reasons, great britain was a needed part of the plan, if
for no other reason than the more countries hitching onto a
shaky multi-lateral endeavor the more legitimate it appears.

I think JFK demonstrates what will happen to anyone trying to
disrupt what the MICC is doing. Which is why o follows the rules
or forfeit his life, making him just another ineffectual president
when it comes to actually presiding and governing this country
or it can be said to an extent, the world. Which presidents since
nixon have willing played the part and for very decent profit.
Nixon didn’t play the game but instead of assassination, he was
allowed to resign. I thought is hard to believe but by some
accounts nixon was trying to change things more than those
who didn’t want change.

Report this
Arabian Sinbad's avatar

By Arabian Sinbad, September 18, 2010 at 11:10 am Link to this comment

Just mentioning the name of this evil character makes me like throwing up! So how would I ever consider wasting my hard-earned money and precious time to read this garbage.

One possible scenario that I might buy a copy of this trash is to use it for starting a fire in a place were this evil one and his other partner in evil, G.W. Bush are meeting, in the hope that this fire will consume the bodies of this evil duo.

Since justice has never been served in regard to the crimes against humanity those two evil ones have committed, burning them alive in a man-made hellfire would be a great symbolic punishment of what these two deserve, though it will not undo all the innocent souls they massacred at the alter of evil political expediency!

Report this

By robert puglia, September 18, 2010 at 8:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

cheney’s obsession was profiteering.

Report this

By Unconventional Ideas, September 18, 2010 at 4:56 am Link to this comment

CitizenWhy said:
>>but Blair remains a moral mystery, a man who congratulates himself an living a good and just life while aiding and abetting a US leadership that was either stupid or borderline evil.<<

First of all, the Cheney/Bush Administration was both stupid and thoroughly evil.

Second, there is no mystery with Blair’s character.  Peel away the facade, and what is left is a moral coward.

The only question is why Blair, a man who knew better latched himself onto the Cheney/Bush Administration instead of doing the right thing.

Had Blair demonstrated moral courage, he could have derailed the Cheney/Bush Administration’s Iraq ambitions.

Report this
Ouroborus's avatar

By Ouroborus, September 18, 2010 at 12:11 am Link to this comment

The interviews and reviews indicate a self serving hypocrite and war criminal.
He and Bush should be sharing a cell in some shit-hole
of a prison.

Report this

By CitizenWhy, September 17, 2010 at 9:51 pm Link to this comment

It is clear enough why Bush went to war against Iraq: Cheney’s obsession with
undoing Bush’s father’s “failure” to eliminate Saddam Hussein and the fear that
the French-Russian plan to get rid of Saddam Hussein by assassination just
might work (replacing him with a General who would pledge to behave in a
more civilized way), thus opening the region to the influence of both Russia
and France. Plus the desire to have a replacement ready for Saudi oil, given the
complicity of some of the Saudi royalty in creating and supporting the Taliban
and Al Queda and the possibility that the US might have to act against this
complicity.

But why did Blair go along? Did he too want to keep Russia and France out of
the region? Did he see this war as Britain’s last chance to be a power in
international affairs? Was he pathetically trying to keep alive the melodramatic
and alleged “special relationship” between the UK and the US?  I really doubt
any of this.

Blair was always, in some way, motivated by a moral sense. What moral
reasoning led him to buy into this war? That is the puzzle. Surely, at some
point, he saw the moral bankruptcy of Bush-Cheney? Did he at some point
think that he could steer them into a more moral direction?  Was he a kind of
clergyman deluded into thinking that he could rescue the Bush-Cheney gang
from their failings?

Yes, the war was wrong and the consequences grim, but Blair remains a moral
mystery, a man who congratulates himself an living a good and just life while
aiding and abetting a US leadership that was either stupid or borderline evil.

Report this

By Conrad C Elledge, September 17, 2010 at 9:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Pretty safe to say Tony the poodle is going to hell. 
The good news is he will be re-associated with the old
war criminal/crimes against humanity gang and they will
use their skills of deceit,  as is their propensity, to
destroy their surroundings. That is, hell will be
destroyed.

Report this

By samosamo, September 17, 2010 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment

****************


By Kanamachi, September 17 at 8:39 pm

As I said, I won’t waste my time by read a book by such a
ghoul just as you won’t either. Best, instead of wasting good
and honourable trees, put it out on one of those electric book
readers so that in a flash it will disappear.

Report this

By Big B, September 17, 2010 at 4:47 pm Link to this comment

I am sure that, like other recent historic figures, Hess and Speer probably thought that they would be appreciated in due time.

Little did we know that the time is now, and the place is Faux news studios and Sarah Palin’s trailer.

Report this
Kanamachi's avatar

By Kanamachi, September 17, 2010 at 4:39 pm Link to this comment

That politicians, like TB, devote a tremendous amount of energy creating image
and illusion for the press and public or, in the case of W, hire mercenaries to do it
for him, is no surprise. It is a mild surprise that we, who have to pay the price for
these peoples’ actions, fall for this ruse every time, present US president not
excluded.
TB is one who was and is particularly good at this art and because of that I
will not waste my time and money on this book, or any other politician’s book.
In this case it is a super waste of the paper it is written on.

Report this
M Henri Day's avatar

By M Henri Day, September 17, 2010 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

Anthony Charles Lynton Blair’s «legacy» ? Sycophancy, deception and murder on a large, if not quite global scale. One can understand why, in his review of this criminal’s book, Peter Stothard chose not to be more explicit about the nature of that «something» that «such a man» did or those «very best of reasons» or that «very deepest thought». We also know that the «consequences», while indeed «terrible», were hardly «unforeseen». My question is - why does TruthDig choose to publish such rubbish ? After all, Mr Stothard does have his own journal to defile….

Henri

Report this

By berniem, September 17, 2010 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

Pity that the world was so quick to tear down Spandau prison. I know of two worthy replacements for Hess and Speer!

Report this

By jr., September 17, 2010 at 11:18 am Link to this comment

F*ck tony blair.

Report this

By SteveL, September 17, 2010 at 10:32 am Link to this comment

Starting to believe that both the U.S. and U.K. governments will not look at a history book of any kind, will rewrite any memories of recent or past history, and reset their own memories every two weeks.

Report this

By robert puglia, September 17, 2010 at 10:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

the careful attention to legacy creation is a sickening
science in which only a malefactor would delve. he
seems to have given this retelling more thought than
the blunder he seeks to repaint. he can depict his
little adventure as fabulously as he pleases, the
evidence tells the story.
more loathsome than the fleeting personages which flash
in the dross is a society which loves- or loves to
hate- such a rogues gallery. in evelyn waugh’s “the
loved one”, sir ambrose abercrombie says of an errant
englishman; better not to have anything to atone for.

Report this

By samosamo, September 17, 2010 at 8:56 am Link to this comment

****************


Glad to have read this review because as with little w, I have no
real need to read this person’s contrived nuances of his terms in
office and bending over for the worst president to have served,
not to leave o out who a is high probability of at least being as
worse. But with all of tb’s machinations these 3 skullduggeried
true threats or puppets of the aristocratic terrorists and since I
have lived during all these meglamaniacs conceited terms, I have
no time to waste reading their ostensibly ‘heroic acts in office’.

Report this

By robertaustin, September 17, 2010 at 8:23 am Link to this comment

Tony Blair has always been an enigma to me. I was unequivocally against the invasion of Iraq before it started. I never liked President Bush, and I was never taken in by his down to Earth simplicity shtick. Yet Tony Blair was a different story. I found the main charming and intelligent. Was it only the accent? I could never understand how he jumped so totally in bed with the Bush gang; he seemed far too reasonable and intelligent for that. The “Ghost Writer” is a great film that give a plausible though fictional answer to the question: “Why would a leader who seemed so much more sophisticated and intelligent than George Bush so willingly become America’s patsy?” What hold did Bush have over Blair. Is there some deep dark secret yet to be revealed, or was Blair so greedy that he went along to enrich himself and his friends? Why, why, why? I just can’t unravel this conundrum. Is there anyone out there who can give me a clear answer. What turned Tony Blair into Faust?

Report this

By Big B, September 17, 2010 at 7:59 am Link to this comment

Just because a megalomanic wears a nice suit and speaks in a familiar polite english tone, doesn’t make him any less of a megalomanic.

The shit always seems to float to the top.

Report this
peterjkraus's avatar

By peterjkraus, September 17, 2010 at 7:52 am Link to this comment

Screw Tony Blair and his lying novel. We’ve had
enough of him and his ilk to last us a lifetime.

Report this

By tedmurphy41, September 17, 2010 at 7:36 am Link to this comment

Whereas other unfortunate people have ended their own journey through life in a premature grave, his “journey” has, hopefully, only just begun.

Report this

By ret-ped, September 17, 2010 at 6:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For those who can read Spanish, there is a pirate version somwhere on the web. I wouldn’t waste my $ to buy this book…nor my time, anyway!

Report this

By peptopinkboots, September 17, 2010 at 6:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nice photo.  He looks like satan.

Report this

By Jim Yell, September 17, 2010 at 6:36 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What is of interest here is not the basically uninteresting musings of an uninteresting political figure who is tied hand and foot to the Failures of Dick Cheney and Baby Bush, but to the fact that not just in this country but in the World, the political structure is protecting the criminals amongst them and like the Catholic Church and its ill advised policy of protecting its own malfactors from identification, we can only hope that they get found out by the world at large.

That is the only way to explain why a post political career had been engineered for this criminal. He is contemptable.

Report this

By John Andersen, September 17, 2010 at 5:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I put Blair right up there with Colin Powell.  Both were men who could have resigned out of principle rather than let Bush and Cheney lie us into the Iraq War.

Both Blair and Powell will go down in history as textbook examples of “Profiles in Cowardice.”

Report this

By jaipurr, September 17, 2010 at 4:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Blair is beneath contempt. Accepting that hypocrisy is now commonplace, this excuse for a man must be acknowledged for reaching its lofty heights. He turned the British Labour Party away from its Socialist roots and transformed it into a clone of the fascist right. He condemned thousand to their death in an illegal war. He lied and lied about the reasons for this war, whilst fawning before Bush.
Yet, of course, he is a “devout” Christian, which seems to make every thing OK, even though Jesus abhorred greed and violence. Blair is less that shit under our shoes and if there actually is a Hell, he, along with Bush, has a reservation.

Report this

By Michael, September 17, 2010 at 4:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I assume this is the story of how Tony Blair removed his head from sucking George Bush’s ass, and being his Lap Dog….. And,  then turning Katholic….. so that he could start sucking on the Pope’s ass!

Report this

By FRTothus, September 17, 2010 at 3:32 am Link to this comment

The poodle shits and puts it between book covers, as if
doing so will make it smell any better.

Report this
fearnotruth's avatar

By fearnotruth, September 16, 2010 at 11:17 pm Link to this comment

The story behind this so-called biography has already emerged in Planski’s “The
Ghost” — the attempt to extradite him to the US was supposedly an attempt to stop
its being completed — an all-around cock-up — historically, Blair and Bush
deserve each other.

Report this

By Hammond Eggs, September 16, 2010 at 10:40 pm Link to this comment

The black garb worn on the dust jacket photograph is indicative of the man’s thoroughly corrupt personality and the death he inflicted upon the innocent.  His ticket to the inner ring of Hell was long ago secured.  Muggy heat and the smell of shit and gunpowder will be his legacy for eternity.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.